Loading…

Inhibitory Learning with Bidirectional Outcomes: Prevention Learning or Causal Learning in the Opposite Direction?

Influential models of causal learning assume that learning about generative and preventive relationships are symmetrical to each other. That is, a preventive cue directly prevents an outcome from occurring (i.e., "direct" prevention) in the same way a generative cue directly causes an outc...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of cognition 2023-03, Vol.6 (1), p.19-19
Main Authors: Chow, Julie Y L, Lee, Jessica C, Lovibond, Peter F
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13
container_end_page 19
container_issue 1
container_start_page 19
container_title Journal of cognition
container_volume 6
creator Chow, Julie Y L
Lee, Jessica C
Lovibond, Peter F
description Influential models of causal learning assume that learning about generative and preventive relationships are symmetrical to each other. That is, a preventive cue directly prevents an outcome from occurring (i.e., "direct" prevention) in the same way a generative cue directly causes an outcome to occur. However, previous studies from our lab have shown that many participants do not infer a direct prevention causal structure after feature-negative discrimination (A+/AB-) with a unidirectional outcome (Lee & Lovibond, 2021). Melchers et al. (2006) suggested that the use of a bidirectional outcome that can either increase or decrease from baseline, encourages direct prevention learning. Here we test an alternative possibility that a bidirectional outcome encourages encoding of a relationship in the direction, where B directly causes a decrease in the outcome. Thus, previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may instead be explained by some participants inferring an "Opposite Causal" structure. In two experiments, participants did indeed report an opposite causal structure. In Experiment 1, these participants showed the lowest outcome predictions when B was combined with a novel cause in a summation test, and lowest outcome predictions when B was presented alone. In Experiment 2, B successfully blocked learning to a novel cue that was directly paired with a reduction in the outcome, and this effect was strongest among participants who endorsed an Opposite Causal structure. We conclude that previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may be a product of excitatory rather than inhibitory learning.
doi_str_mv 10.5334/joc.266
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e2b6b86d6d364143a047f2486debc70e</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_e2b6b86d6d364143a047f2486debc70e</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2786513292</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkc1uGyEUhVHVqonSqG9QsWs3Tvkbhukmap3-WLLkLpI1usPcsbHGgwtMqrx9SJ24yQp0-PhA9xDynrOLSkr1eRvchdD6FTkVFVczZQR7_Wx_Qs5T2jLGBK8E0_ItOZG64awy8pTExbjxrc8h3tElQhz9uKZ_fd7Qb77zEV32YYSBrqbswg7TF_o74i2OD_H_CyHSOUypcMfIjzRvkK72-5B8Rnr1JLt8R970MCQ8f1zPyM2P79fzX7Pl6udi_nU5c5Ws86zusWu4ctgCa3ouVWOY1p10BnoOIGXlUBvNDLqqByPBaSebtqk7MF0FXJ6RxcHbBdjaffQ7iHc2gLf_ghDXFmL2bkCLotWt0V3Ra8WVBKbqXqiSYOtqhsV1eXDtp3aHnSsDiDC8kL48Gf3GrsOt5WXuTApWDJ8eDTH8mTBlu_PJ4TDAiGFKVtRGV1yKRhT04wF1MaQUsT--w5l9aNyWxm1pvJAfnn_ryD31K-8BoWao0w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2786513292</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inhibitory Learning with Bidirectional Outcomes: Prevention Learning or Causal Learning in the Opposite Direction?</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Chow, Julie Y L ; Lee, Jessica C ; Lovibond, Peter F</creator><creatorcontrib>Chow, Julie Y L ; Lee, Jessica C ; Lovibond, Peter F</creatorcontrib><description>Influential models of causal learning assume that learning about generative and preventive relationships are symmetrical to each other. That is, a preventive cue directly prevents an outcome from occurring (i.e., "direct" prevention) in the same way a generative cue directly causes an outcome to occur. However, previous studies from our lab have shown that many participants do not infer a direct prevention causal structure after feature-negative discrimination (A+/AB-) with a unidirectional outcome (Lee &amp; Lovibond, 2021). Melchers et al. (2006) suggested that the use of a bidirectional outcome that can either increase or decrease from baseline, encourages direct prevention learning. Here we test an alternative possibility that a bidirectional outcome encourages encoding of a relationship in the direction, where B directly causes a decrease in the outcome. Thus, previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may instead be explained by some participants inferring an "Opposite Causal" structure. In two experiments, participants did indeed report an opposite causal structure. In Experiment 1, these participants showed the lowest outcome predictions when B was combined with a novel cause in a summation test, and lowest outcome predictions when B was presented alone. In Experiment 2, B successfully blocked learning to a novel cue that was directly paired with a reduction in the outcome, and this effect was strongest among participants who endorsed an Opposite Causal structure. We conclude that previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may be a product of excitatory rather than inhibitory learning.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2514-4820</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2514-4820</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5334/joc.266</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36910583</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Ubiquity Press</publisher><subject>bidirectional outcomes ; causal learning ; causal structure ; feature negative ; prevention</subject><ispartof>Journal of cognition, 2023-03, Vol.6 (1), p.19-19</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s).</rights><rights>Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s) 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4253-2008 ; 0000-0002-7515-9601 ; 0000-0003-2146-9054</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10000320/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10000320/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27923,27924,53790,53792</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36910583$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chow, Julie Y L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Jessica C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lovibond, Peter F</creatorcontrib><title>Inhibitory Learning with Bidirectional Outcomes: Prevention Learning or Causal Learning in the Opposite Direction?</title><title>Journal of cognition</title><addtitle>J Cogn</addtitle><description>Influential models of causal learning assume that learning about generative and preventive relationships are symmetrical to each other. That is, a preventive cue directly prevents an outcome from occurring (i.e., "direct" prevention) in the same way a generative cue directly causes an outcome to occur. However, previous studies from our lab have shown that many participants do not infer a direct prevention causal structure after feature-negative discrimination (A+/AB-) with a unidirectional outcome (Lee &amp; Lovibond, 2021). Melchers et al. (2006) suggested that the use of a bidirectional outcome that can either increase or decrease from baseline, encourages direct prevention learning. Here we test an alternative possibility that a bidirectional outcome encourages encoding of a relationship in the direction, where B directly causes a decrease in the outcome. Thus, previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may instead be explained by some participants inferring an "Opposite Causal" structure. In two experiments, participants did indeed report an opposite causal structure. In Experiment 1, these participants showed the lowest outcome predictions when B was combined with a novel cause in a summation test, and lowest outcome predictions when B was presented alone. In Experiment 2, B successfully blocked learning to a novel cue that was directly paired with a reduction in the outcome, and this effect was strongest among participants who endorsed an Opposite Causal structure. We conclude that previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may be a product of excitatory rather than inhibitory learning.</description><subject>bidirectional outcomes</subject><subject>causal learning</subject><subject>causal structure</subject><subject>feature negative</subject><subject>prevention</subject><issn>2514-4820</issn><issn>2514-4820</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkc1uGyEUhVHVqonSqG9QsWs3Tvkbhukmap3-WLLkLpI1usPcsbHGgwtMqrx9SJ24yQp0-PhA9xDynrOLSkr1eRvchdD6FTkVFVczZQR7_Wx_Qs5T2jLGBK8E0_ItOZG64awy8pTExbjxrc8h3tElQhz9uKZ_fd7Qb77zEV32YYSBrqbswg7TF_o74i2OD_H_CyHSOUypcMfIjzRvkK72-5B8Rnr1JLt8R970MCQ8f1zPyM2P79fzX7Pl6udi_nU5c5Ws86zusWu4ctgCa3ouVWOY1p10BnoOIGXlUBvNDLqqByPBaSebtqk7MF0FXJ6RxcHbBdjaffQ7iHc2gLf_ghDXFmL2bkCLotWt0V3Ra8WVBKbqXqiSYOtqhsV1eXDtp3aHnSsDiDC8kL48Gf3GrsOt5WXuTApWDJ8eDTH8mTBlu_PJ4TDAiGFKVtRGV1yKRhT04wF1MaQUsT--w5l9aNyWxm1pvJAfnn_ryD31K-8BoWao0w</recordid><startdate>20230310</startdate><enddate>20230310</enddate><creator>Chow, Julie Y L</creator><creator>Lee, Jessica C</creator><creator>Lovibond, Peter F</creator><general>Ubiquity Press</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4253-2008</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7515-9601</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2146-9054</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230310</creationdate><title>Inhibitory Learning with Bidirectional Outcomes: Prevention Learning or Causal Learning in the Opposite Direction?</title><author>Chow, Julie Y L ; Lee, Jessica C ; Lovibond, Peter F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>bidirectional outcomes</topic><topic>causal learning</topic><topic>causal structure</topic><topic>feature negative</topic><topic>prevention</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chow, Julie Y L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Jessica C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lovibond, Peter F</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chow, Julie Y L</au><au>Lee, Jessica C</au><au>Lovibond, Peter F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inhibitory Learning with Bidirectional Outcomes: Prevention Learning or Causal Learning in the Opposite Direction?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cognition</jtitle><addtitle>J Cogn</addtitle><date>2023-03-10</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>19</spage><epage>19</epage><pages>19-19</pages><issn>2514-4820</issn><eissn>2514-4820</eissn><abstract>Influential models of causal learning assume that learning about generative and preventive relationships are symmetrical to each other. That is, a preventive cue directly prevents an outcome from occurring (i.e., "direct" prevention) in the same way a generative cue directly causes an outcome to occur. However, previous studies from our lab have shown that many participants do not infer a direct prevention causal structure after feature-negative discrimination (A+/AB-) with a unidirectional outcome (Lee &amp; Lovibond, 2021). Melchers et al. (2006) suggested that the use of a bidirectional outcome that can either increase or decrease from baseline, encourages direct prevention learning. Here we test an alternative possibility that a bidirectional outcome encourages encoding of a relationship in the direction, where B directly causes a decrease in the outcome. Thus, previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may instead be explained by some participants inferring an "Opposite Causal" structure. In two experiments, participants did indeed report an opposite causal structure. In Experiment 1, these participants showed the lowest outcome predictions when B was combined with a novel cause in a summation test, and lowest outcome predictions when B was presented alone. In Experiment 2, B successfully blocked learning to a novel cue that was directly paired with a reduction in the outcome, and this effect was strongest among participants who endorsed an Opposite Causal structure. We conclude that previous evidence of direct prevention learning using bidirectional outcomes may be a product of excitatory rather than inhibitory learning.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Ubiquity Press</pub><pmid>36910583</pmid><doi>10.5334/joc.266</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4253-2008</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7515-9601</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2146-9054</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2514-4820
ispartof Journal of cognition, 2023-03, Vol.6 (1), p.19-19
issn 2514-4820
2514-4820
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e2b6b86d6d364143a047f2486debc70e
source PubMed Central
subjects bidirectional outcomes
causal learning
causal structure
feature negative
prevention
title Inhibitory Learning with Bidirectional Outcomes: Prevention Learning or Causal Learning in the Opposite Direction?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T02%3A57%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inhibitory%20Learning%20with%20Bidirectional%20Outcomes:%20Prevention%20Learning%20or%20Causal%20Learning%20in%20the%20Opposite%20Direction?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cognition&rft.au=Chow,%20Julie%20Y%20L&rft.date=2023-03-10&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=19&rft.epage=19&rft.pages=19-19&rft.issn=2514-4820&rft.eissn=2514-4820&rft_id=info:doi/10.5334/joc.266&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2786513292%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c537t-7fed914ceba09f13498066d3c8af1aa335ce68608ec5fa83ac6c39b97da8d5a13%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2786513292&rft_id=info:pmid/36910583&rfr_iscdi=true